it's not that he supported hillary, it's that he's a lobbyist for big pharma.
-
Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.
Rep Keith Ellison of Minnesota will hopefully be the new DNC chairperson
- Thread starter Lubricus
- Start date
- Status
it's not that he supported hillary, it's that he's a lobbyist for big pharma.
The parties chair at this point in time does not and should not shape the party's ideology. The party's chair is also not the "model Democrat" that the party props up for future election.
The DNC's chair chief concern over the next four years is to win every single race possible. You can't do that on a part time schedule with so much the party has lost.
Or shall I post the image of everything the party has lost under the purview of part-time chair's and political cronies?
Mahadev
Member
When the chair who is now a known corporate shill starts using the same tactics the previous ones did voters will care.
no, they don't. the way we digest media has changed, the elected president is already hated, people have become much more polarized with their parties than in the 80s, and this administration isn't going to usher us in a temporary economic boom but a disaster.
Of course Cenk wants Tulsi Gabbard and Nina Turner.
And how is he going to corrupt the DNC? By running big pharma candidates? GTFO.
Ellison is going to be a part timer, and we also had first hand account on this thread that he isn't a very good organizer or political animal. Sell me on Ellison as DNC chair. How is he going to rebuild our party in GA, AL, FL, LA? What are his plans for the states we cant run super progressives? How much time is he going to have to recruit long shot candidates for local and house seat in red states?
Democrats have lost over 900 seats in state legislatures since Obama presdency.
900
Leave your purity tests for the next presidential candidate people.
Liberals should not care if the chair of the DNC is Mussolini rebirthed. We have four years before Republicans can pass constitutional amendments with no obstruction. Four years.
I don't know how to make this any clearer.
WTF are you even talking about? What same tactics? Dean presided over the DNC during Hillary/Obama primary and remained impartial.
Dean also pioneered the 50 state strategy and ran the most successful DNC in decades. All other DNC chairs since him were part timers that "commited" to the 50 state strategy but were unwilling to spend real capital on it.
Show me what skillset Ellison brings to build our party in red states?
The difference is...
DEAN WON! DEAN WASN'T BEHOLDEN TO THE INTERESTS OF ANY CANDIDATE. THAT'S WHY HE WAS PUSHED OUT!
No one should be talking shit about the progress Howard Dean achieved for the Democratic Party and the liberal movement by pushing candidate out there that people were willing to vote for.
it's not about "purity" of socialism but this disaster of an election has been a result of eight years of democrats being tied down by self-interests, hubris, and corporate loyalty to the point where the working class feels that they've been deserted. because they have
choosing the pharma lobbyist over the people who seen this coming a year away and you've already kneecapped your chances of recovering by 2018
Yep. I have no issue with the fact that Dean supported Hillary, and I'm sure he was a good chair in the past, but I don't want a former pharma lobbyist running the DNC. He disqualified himself as far as I'm concerned when he took that job.
GoldenEye 007
Member
So explain Steele and Prebius as RNC chairs dominating the national landscape since 2008? With Prebius now in line for Chief of Staff.
That's an interesting sentiment, because...
DEAN WON ELECTIONS.
And wasn't involved with the party for the last 8 years.
Look, if it isn't someone with qualifications, a part timer with no prior qualifitions or experience that would be learning on the job is the antithesis of what we need.
We did that before with Kaine and Wasserman Schultz. It didn't work.
The chair does not shape the direction of the party. Nothing about his past would have an effect on the simple fact that he would have to be focused on winning elections
I just don't know how to communicate the dire, dire, dire circumstances the Democratic Party and the liberal movement are in chiefly because of the failures of the last three chairs. I don't know what's going to have to happen for it to click that you need to win before you even discuss ideology in American politics.
GoldenEye 007
Member
Yeah this purity test thing is concerning. He built an infrastructure which facilitated the ability to win elections. The only important thing for a chair is getting the job done and managing the organization. Nobody should be looking to a party chair to shape the ideology of the larger organization. The electorate defines that.
This may all be true, but experienced political operators like Harry Reid, and Chuck Schumer seem to be fine with Ellison, and they, presumably, know him and his qualifications better than me or you.
I think putting a pharma lobbyist in charge of the DNC is just an unforced error at a time like this. Even if it has zero effect on how he runs things.
There have to be other people, NEW people, who could do a good job.
If Ellison is backed by Sanders, Warren, and Shumer, that would seem to me to indicate he is pretty likely to get it because those are the three most influential Democrats left (after Obama and Biden leave office).
I don't really know how much being "part-time" matters. Maybe it does; maybe it doesn't. There were other problems with Kaine/Wassermen-Shultz/Brazille that go beyond whether or not they held other positions. Honestly, I'm not sure either Kaine or Brazille held the job long enough to really pin any blame on them; although their performance in other capacities was awful. I still have nightmares about the abomination that the Gore campaign turned into (earth tones; awkward French kisses on national TV).
To his credit, everything I've read about Ellison indicates he has a vision for what he wants to do as chair. It doesn't seem like he just wants it for status or because he likes going to fundraisers (hi Debbie). He did seem to grasp the threat Trump posed earlier than everyone else as well.
I don't really know how much being "part-time" matters. Maybe it does; maybe it doesn't. There were other problems with Kaine/Wassermen-Shultz/Brazille that go beyond whether or not they held other positions. Honestly, I'm not sure either Kaine or Brazille held the job long enough to really pin any blame on them; although their performance in other capacities was awful. I still have nightmares about the abomination that the Gore campaign turned into (earth tones; awkward French kisses on national TV).
To his credit, everything I've read about Ellison indicates he has a vision for what he wants to do as chair. It doesn't seem like he just wants it for status or because he likes going to fundraisers (hi Debbie). He did seem to grasp the threat Trump posed earlier than everyone else as well.
Mahadev
Member
OMG dude, you just refuse to get it. The political climate 8 years ago isn't the same as now. People are fucking pissed off at the establishment, they don't give a shit about cheap political tricks anymore, they want politicians who aren't the same shit as before. Even President clown understood what's going on and exploited it yet many of you just... don't... get it.
Lack of infighting got of DSW, Clinton, and the biggest asswhoopin in a 100 years.
They need someone who will make it their full time job to turn around the party.
Splash Wave
Member
Electing Dean would be a fucking terrible idea. That dude is completely out of touch with what the party needs:
https://theintercept.com/2016/01/21...g-sad-history-of-selling-himself-on-k-street/
The chairman of the DNC isn't running in any of these races.
You have to understand that their personally philosophy doesn't factor.
And eight years ago wasn't that long ago.
I don't care about Dean. But he does have accomplishments in the position.
And, most importantly, what I'm trying to get through is that this job is faaaaaaaaaar to big for anyone ANYONE to be doing it part time. There zero room for error or miscalculation. Zero.
We have to make loses in every area of political spectrum.
We can't talk about ideology until we actually win. Fuck liberal ideals, at this point, the U.S. Constitution is on the line.
Abstrusity
Member
Hmm, I dunno. We might be safer with Dean. He's not quite incorruptible but it's still going to be a gamble. What happens, four years from now, when people decide "wow, holy shit, picking someone who doesn't know shit about governance really turned out bad, maybe we shouldn't do that?"
On the other hand, we need to be on the offensive, and anti-establishment fervor right now is at an all time high.
Would that we could have TWO chairs, both Dean and Ellison. Dean is certainly brash enough to push for everything, but Ellison would tap into the people's rage against the machine better than Dean would.
On the other hand, we need to be on the offensive, and anti-establishment fervor right now is at an all time high.
Would that we could have TWO chairs, both Dean and Ellison. Dean is certainly brash enough to push for everything, but Ellison would tap into the people's rage against the machine better than Dean would.
The chair does not shape the party's ideology. The platform does, and that's already been agreed upon.
All the chairman needs to do is win elections. Multiple ones. Across every state. In every level of government.
That's thousands of elections across thousands of local communities. That is not the job for someone that has to serve their constituents above the need of anything else.
PJV3
Member
Please don't make the mistake of fighting this election again in 2020, after 4 years of Trump people might be crying out for the establishment and real politicians to sort out the mess.
GoldenEye 007
Member
The chair doesn't run for election. He or she is supposed to manage the organization and ensure everyone within it understands the electorate and supports candidates that are viable in their races in their respective areas. At least that is my understanding.
So if the chair is able to understand that in one area a pragmatic, establishment candidate will work best, then then run them. If a populous, anti-establishment person in another, then do that.
I don't care if it is Dean or Ellison or otherwise new blood, as long as they can stop the bleeding and get back on track for as soon as 2018 and obviously 2020 and beyond.
and you get a decent paying job! and you get a decent paying job! and you get a decent paying job!
Funky Papa
FUNK-Y-PPA-4
He sounds like a man with the proper mindset for the task of bringing the DNC to the new era, but I'm somewhat worried about how it could play. Republicans are already ecstatic with the rumours, claiming that putting a Muslim in front of the DNC may invigorate their base.
Granted, Republican votes were far from increasing in vast numbers during the past election, but God knows it could turn nasty. I'm honestly very wary of the potential effects of a Trump presidency, specially if he puts the alt-right at the forefront of his administration. Identity politics may become something even nastier.
Granted, Republican votes were far from increasing in vast numbers during the past election, but God knows it could turn nasty. I'm honestly very wary of the potential effects of a Trump presidency, specially if he puts the alt-right at the forefront of his administration. Identity politics may become something even nastier.
MagnaderAlpha
Member
Whomever can do the job and get power back for the DNC through state-plans and regaining the trust of those who we lost this past election, so be it. If Dean could do that(regardless of being a lobbyist) and clear a path for us retaking the Senate and White House, so be it. This is the prize in sight, and given how fucked we are currently, I willing to put my faith in him. If both he and Ellison work together, that's even better. We NEED some movement on this, though, and we NEED to target every aspect where we went wrong.
trump channeled all the racism in america already
elrechazado
Banned
I don't get the dnc obsession with having part timers do this job, particularly ones that they want to have as their up and coming face of the party and message. Nobody is saying Bernie or Warren for this - high energy people in the house is needed, and not running the party part time.
The Technomancer
card-carrying scientician
nah maaaaaaan you just don't get it ESTABLISHMENT ESTABLISHMENT ESTARBLESTMENT
I also don't get the framing of Ellison as "not the establishment", he's been a congressman for like a decade at this point
Funky Papa
FUNK-Y-PPA-4
That's kind of what I'm hoping. Well, that and politics not getting any more sectarian. Alas...
The Technomancer
card-carrying scientician
I'm fine with anything that gives Dean actual operational authority to organize races and dictate strategy. I love Ellison to death and if getting him as an ostensible head is what it takes to make some people happy I'm all for it, but right now when I look at 2018 I want someone who has danced this dance and knows how to run candidates and allocate resources
Agreed. I think a combo, provided there is no major headbutting solves both problems.
The most important aspect of 2018 IMO is gubernatorial/state legislature elections and luckily, the terrain there is much more favorable than the Senate terrain. It is heartening that both Dean and Ellison have voiced strong support for rebuilding the local parties and grassroots. That wins local elections.
GoldenEye 007
Member
Yes, if they are confident with him, then that does help.
titiklabingapat
Member
Some of you guys are picking the wrong battles to fight if you think that head of DNC should be a high profile job. It shouldn't and someone with the experience in giving Democrats actual wins in these turbulent times should be the one who get the job. Not the jobbers like DWS or someone new and unproven like Elisson.
Dean can groom Ellison if it comes down to it.
Dean can groom Ellison if it comes down to it.
hodayathink
Member
I did (it's why I mentioned the lack of control of the state houses in terms of fixing gerrymandering), but for some reason I didn't apply it to my whole thought process.
sunshine and gasoline
Banned
If Ellison can't do the job full time then he shouldn't even be considered. Right now, what is needed is someone who can devote all of himself/herself to the job. And frankly, we need someone with experience in leading the DNC.
If Ellison wants to do this job full time then by all means.
Dean isn't shaping the party platform. He's a known quantity. He's done this job before and has proven himself an excellent chair. His ideology is irrelevant, all that matters are his organizational skills.
This isn't about establishment vs. anti-establishment. That's irrelevant in this position. What matters is commitment, and we've had nothing but disaster with part timers.
If Ellison wants to do both jobs, then he should be chair in name only to pacify Sanders Democrats. He better have someone under him working around the clock, because we need him working in congress around the clock to prevent the abominations that Trump is about to force onto this country.
breakYODAy
Member
It really doesn't matter what Dean accomplished 8 years ago. If you put him in now it will look bad, and turn people off. The Democrats cannot afford to squander the anti-Trump energy on the left with their same old pro-corporate crap. People like Ellison have the ability to harness that grassroots energy and turn it into votes for progressive Democrats in 2018.
We have to put the brakes on the Trump agenda in Congress ASAP, by winning the house back quickly. I don't think Dean has the fire to do that anymore.
Dark Cloud
Member
It needs to be done and set before 2018. Change starts in 2018.
i don't think dean ever lost that fire. hell he specifically said he would do the job as recently as a week ago.
the guy was pushed out for really no good reason. i think he or someone who has good skills running an operation should fucking do the job.
i'm worried that if there is too charismatic a leader then it puts a target on the democratic party as a whole. get someone in there who can do the job of actually building up at the state level where those charismatic leaders might come from.
Not to mention in 2006 and 2008 the big draw to the voting booth was Bush and the Iraq War.
Colonel Mustard
Banned
He's changing party affiliation and is a giant slime ball.
Keith is a solid choice. Will help get some unity on the left. That's one tentative step forward...
Yeah, dude lost his way. Shame.
Yeah, dude lost his way. Shame.
- Status
Similar threads
- Locked
- Locked